[Oradlist] Publish and review or perish

[akiro at hiroshima-u.ac.jp]

Dear oradlist members,

I have some concerns about peer review system and the contribution of 
"reviewers" and "acknowledgement" for the promotion in academic 
faculty position.

Recently, some journals such as the BMJ, Annals Inter Med, and so on 
adopt open (non-blind) peer review system because of some merits like 
"open peer review should increase both the credit and accountability 
for peer reviewing, both of which seem desirable"(BMJ, 1999). The 
authors in BioMed Central in London present presents 4 key arguments 
in its favor: (1) ethical superiority, (2) lack of important adverse 
effects, (3) feasibility in practice, and (4) potential to balance 
greater accountability for reviewers with credit for the
work they do (JAMA, 2002). It seems to me that open peer review is 
superior to other system (single or double blind system) in the view 
point of the development in the biomedical field as well as other 
fields, however, some dental journals still keep the latter, 
especially anonymous peer review.
Of course, as van Rooyen et al. demonstrate in their randomized trial 
(BMJ, 1999),  the innovation of open peer review may increase the 
likelihood of reviewers declining to review.
Please let me know as to whether open peer review also is useful in 
dental journals. The opinions from the editors of the journals are 
really welcome.

Also, I would like to ask all members about whether the institutions 
or Universities take "the contribution for review of the journals" or 
"acknowledgement"  into account when considering the promotion in 
academic position. Of course, I know that they consider "the 
scientific paper" "book" and "presentation" but I have no information 
about "the contribution of review" and "acknowledgement".
In January issue of Science, Dr. Perrin, the a past editor of Marine 
Mammal Science and a present associate editor of the Journal of 
Mammalogy, describes that "Doing a fair share of peer reviews should 
be a recognized and expected part of the job for scientific 
professionals; it should be written into the job descriptions of 
salaried scientists and be considered in evaluating junior faculty 
for tenure."(Science, 2008).
Dr. Perrin weeps about the difficulty of finding "appropriate reviewers".
Lack of appropriate reviewers results in poor quality review and low 
quality paper.
How about this problem in your institutions or Universities?
Please let me know if you have good system in your institutions or 
you have some opinions about this.

Thank you so much in advance.

Best wishes,

Akira Taguchi
Hiroshima University Hospital
-- 
////////////////////////////////////////////
Akira Taguchi, DDS, PhD
Clinical Associate Professor
Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology
Hiroshima University Hospital
1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8553
Japan
Tel. +81-82-257-5691
Fax. +81-82-257-5692
////////////////////////////////////////////